Prev: subclass a Maskedbox
Next: Custom Browser
From: Patrice on 19 Mar 2010 06:55
> My program will find information on 2000 to 3000 files per second on a
> USB drive but only return information on about 2 files per second.

The difference being ? My understanding is that you are finding files fast
but that it is much slow findout a particular information about each of
those files.

Knowing which information and how you proceed could help. The fastest way
would be likely to use the Windows API (see perhaps the CFileSeach class
topic few messages earlier) at it will both find and get various information
on those files at the same time rather than getting at them one after the
other...

Od could it be something hardware specific (you have the same behavior on
all USB drives ?)

--
Patrice




From: Jeff Johnson on 19 Mar 2010 09:13
<Just_a_fan(a)home.net> wrote in message
news:ie46q51mek4vdampeabsn3hq4qblkuaq22(a)4ax.com...

>I have written and tested programs from others for a long time and
> cannot find any way to get UNC files fast.
>
> My program will find information on 2000 to 3000 files per second on a
> USB drive but only return information on about 2 files per second.
>
> What can I do to get a useful speed on UNC drives similar to Explorer's
> performance?

When you said "USB" above, was that simply a typo and you meant to say "UNC"
throughout your post? If not, what in the world do USB drives have to do
with UNC paths?


From: Helmut Meukel on 19 Mar 2010 18:47
<Just_a_fan(a)home.net> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:cas7q59edk3ebs0k3bj395e1pka8opbvkc(a)4ax.com...
> Yeah, I typed USB once and UNC 3 times. They should have all been UNC.
> USB is not a factor. These are all hard drives on a stand-alone server
> of some kind (not Windows server). Normally it is *nix in the box and
> connected to a 100Mbps network link.
>
> Will also try it with FreeNAS that I am working on as a possible
> solution to sharing and backup.
>
> This happens on all computers I have tried it with on all UNC drives.
>
> I will try it without getting the file information, just for timing. It
> may be that getting file size/date modified is what is taking so much
> time.
>


Mike,

a cheap hardware solution would be using a NDAS instead of a NAS.
My Network Direct Attached Storage looks like an external drive, has
GigaBit network and USB connectors and comes with drivers for
Win2000 to Windows 7. I payed 81 Euro for the box and put a 2 TB
drive into it. The NDAS is connected to my GigaBit switch and looks
like a local drive to all computers in my network.
My NDAS is a geman make (from Dawicontrol) based on american
technology. http://www.ximeta.com

Helmut.

 | 
Pages: 1
Prev: subclass a Maskedbox
Next: Custom Browser